HARJIT KAUR Vs. SANT RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present revision petition is by the landlord challenging the order passed by the authorities under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 dismissing the ejectment petition under Section 13 of the said Act on the ground of material impairment of the value and utility of the building.

(2.) THE brief facts out of which the present revision petition arises is that the petitioners are owners of the vacant land measuring 40' x 50', which was let out to the respondent on a monthly rent of Rs. 10/-, which was increased to Rs. 35/- per month later on. The petitioners have sought the ejectment of the respondent, inter-alia, on the ground that the tenant has materially impaired the value and utility of the building on account of the constructions made by him. The respondent appeared and stated in the written statement that the land was taken on rent for running a saw mill and he has raised only temporary construction for the proper use of the area. However, the learned Rent Controller passed an order of ejectment holding that the constructions raised by the tenant have materially impaired the value and utility of the building, whereas the appellate authority reversed such finding holding that the constructions have been made by the tenant for the installation of electric meter in order to run the saw mill and that the shed and the wall are constructed of temporary nature. It was found that such temporary construction does not impair the value and utility of the building.

(3.) AFTER going through the records of the case, I do not find that the finding recorded by the appellate authority suffers from any material illegality or irregularity.